"B&$@~~!s! The rational thing to do is to find out who Sir Keinly infected and do whatever it takes to make sure they can't hurt anyone... are you trying to distract us from that goal with your trinkets?"

Six posts and only one half-insinuated accusation? What kind of werewolf game is this?!

Come on everyone, let fly!

I'm working on it. Bruce ninja'd my post though placing me in the pub instead of the market like I wanted. Its no big deal. We need to get some people to the pub. I can't leave while there are customers there.

This is a small village, conceiveably everything could be built around a village square or common area so that we're all within shouting distance. Just pop open a window and have your say at everyone making such a commotion outside.

"B&$@~~!s! The rational thing to do is to find out who Sir Keinly infected and do whatever it takes to make sure they can't hurt anyone... are you trying to distract us from that goal with your trinkets?"

Huh. I really didn't expect the profanity filter to catch that word.

I think it's fine in the singular, like bastard sword, but not in the plural. Although I sometimes use b*ds.

I got hooked on it because of a great first game. I started play as Starbuck, the game ended with one of the cylon players revealed, the other still hidden. I somehow ended up with both President and Admiral titles. We jumped and the two cards I drew would either win or lose the game depending which I played. The other players, including the cylon player, were sure I was the other cylon. Well, in the end, I was human. It was like we won the superbowl or something. Great game.

Changing to a null vote. The chances of actually catching a wolf at this point are minimal, and I feel guilty about taking someone out of the game before it actually starts.

What is the break-even point with this line of reasoning? We start out with a 20% chance, and it seems that it would be in our best interest to take that chance rather than let the wolves whittle us down. If we do nothing at the wolves kill a villager, then we're down to 3/14, which only brings our odd up to 21.4 percent.

If we continue to do nothing, our odds (by pure statistical chance) are:

Changing to a null vote. The chances of actually catching a wolf at this point are minimal, and I feel guilty about taking someone out of the game before it actually starts.

What is the break-even point with this line of reasoning? We start out with a 20% chance, and it seems that it would be in our best interest to take that chance rather than let the wolves whittle us down. If we do nothing at the wolves kill a villager, then we're down to 3/14, which only brings our odd up to 21.4 percent.

If we continue to do nothing, our odds (by pure statistical chance) are:

...it seems to be in our best interest to take every chance we get to kill a werewolf, rather than abstain.

Point conceded. Although my secondary reason still stands, plus the fact that I'm trying to play Thoen as a naturally rational and trusting person--willing to give others the benefit of the doubt. He very easily might change his mind if others also express evidence of wrong through their own suspicions though, so he might change his mind once solid accusations begin to be revealed.

"'Better among us?' The last time I checked, we were looking for werewolves, not participating in some petty popularity contest." He takes a swig of his brandy, before casting a sidelong glance towards the pub.

"Besides, surely McWhite would win that competition, considering the booze he fills our bellies with on a daily basis. That moonshine or what have you.

"My only secret is I am not a werewolf or normal villager. Remember to Lynch my accusers when my role is revealed. "

...and now you've made yourself wolf bait, if you manage to talk yourself out of a lynching. Bragging about being the scryer or baner (or mason?) this early in the game is unlikely to do any good, it's usually best revealed once you have something to definitive to report. I suppose if you're baner I'm unlikely to get protected tonight- unless I ask nicely?

Thanks! I'm glad I decided to play a bookworm, I'm having a lot of fun reading up on werewolf lore and sprinkling tidbits all through my posts. I'm trying not to post all the cool stuff I come across here in the first round so I'll have plenty of interesting IC bits to mention down the line.

Time to start catching up on everything and find the most appropriate way to post IC. I'll try to be more active in the future.

Question to Ryuko: Can we get a player list up? I believe you mentioned 1 werewolf per 5 players, I think we're somewhere around 15 so there are 3 this game correct? Are all the roles being used including werewolf roles? (If we're allowed to know any of the above, of course)

Thanks for any clarification

-----

Thoughts on OOC strategy: I agree with the sentiment that non-abstaining is probably a poor move as stated by Alessandra above. You can't win if you don't play and elimination is simply part of the game.

Another thought is vote control. The more fragmented our votes become the stronger control each werewolf has over the eventual outcome. If we have say 4 or 5 candidates all with 1 to 2 votes a werewolf's vote counts for more than say if we had two candidates with with 4 or 6 votes on them.

Further, I find it good practice to always hang those that are abstaining from voting. A person who doesn't vote consistently is simply a boon to a werewolf. The math generally already favors the antagonists as is so minimizing their advantage is probably a good thing unless you want a quick shut out.

I prefer and bandwagon attempt in that most people simply pile their votes on to one candidate. With the caveat that after a round or two of not catching a bad guy everyone turns on the person who started the bandwagon to discourage wolves from using the tactic to their advantage.

On another note if you have a special role and your about to be hanged it's probably wise to simply reveal it IC a few hours before if possible. The goal not being to avoid the noose, but rather inform the rest of the citizenry of your findings before you go to the gallows and are silenced forever.

Agree with what the doctor said, but I've seen the bandwagon approach go both ways. It can make people very reluctant to vote for anyone and encourages people to just sit back and play it safe by following along with whatever the current consensus is rather than really getting into the spirit of the game.

With the understanding that overall vote control is very, very important I prefer to see people voice their votes early in the round, with a lot of wild accusations and justifications being thrown about. After the dust settles people can change their votes to converge on whoever most rouses their suspicious or is least entertaining- with the caveat that those who leave their votes in ineffective places that result in ties will be first up for the voting next round.

There was hardly any voting in this round, with just the one early vote for wowbagger then a few days of RP before me and Wowbagger traded votes. Heck, the round is ending tonight and more than two thirds of the participants haven't cast a vote yet.

Thoughts on OOC strategy: I agree with the sentiment that non-abstaining is probably a poor move as stated by Alessandra above. You can't win if you don't play and elimination is simply part of the game.

Another thought is vote control. The more fragmented our votes become the stronger control each werewolf has over the eventual outcome. If we have say 4 or 5 candidates all with 1 to 2 votes a werewolf's vote counts for more than say if we had two candidates with with 4 or 6 votes on them.

Further, I find it good practice to always hang those that are abstaining from voting. A person who doesn't vote consistently is simply a boon to a werewolf. The math generally already favors the antagonists as is so minimizing their advantage is probably a good thing unless you want a quick shut out.

I prefer and bandwagon attempt in that most people simply pile their votes on to one candidate. With the caveat that after a round or two of not catching a bad guy everyone turns on the person who started the bandwagon to discourage wolves from using the tactic to their advantage.

On another note if you have a special role and your about to be hanged it's probably wise to simply reveal it IC a few hours before if possible. The goal not being to avoid the noose, but rather inform the rest of the citizenry of your findings before you go to the gallows and are silenced forever.

I think your strategy has merit from a purely mechanical perspective but it's a little too munchkin-y for me personally. I agree that if we want to "win" against the werewolfs there's something to be said for this but I personally like the idea of people voting based on the strength of the roleplaying. If that leads to a fragmented vote then so be it.

If people choose to abstain, to me that simply means that the people pushing for the votes aren't selling their side well enough to convince the others. We've had a few people trying to get a vote started against certain characters and part of the challenge is on them to convince the others that their position is right. I don't think someone should be punished simply because they choose not to vote if they don't feel justified in picking someone. Let me be clear, this is not the same as voting for people who simply aren't posting. If they're not active in the game, then they have it coming to them but if they're posting and simply aren't convinced of someone's "guilt", why should we gang up on them outside of making the game easier?

As far as revealing the role, I saw in the other game that Ryuko would announce someone's role when they were eliminated so that shouldn't be an issue. I think if people were to do this IC before the final vote, it would indeed sway some people to change their votes. That's why Ryuko wants everything in PM, to keep it a secret.

Anyways, these are just my thoughts. In this type of game there is no right or wrong way to play, just different styles and viewpoints.

@Bruce: Oh yeah it is a bit munchkin-y and I'm not advocating it superseding roleplaying in any fashion. Just figured I'd chime in on mechanical perspective of vote control. You don't need to do anything optimal to have fun or anything, but for anyone interested on the mechanical aspects of things it's simply food for thought. You don't need to win to have fun or anything, but winning is always nice in of itself as long as doing so doesn't impede your enjoyment any way. Basically abstaining from voting, wider vote pools, and ties are a boon to the antagonists the value of which increases the higher the round is. You don't need to let to colour your game play or anything, but the knowledge isn't harmful.

@Prof Alessandra: I agree it's a bit hit or miss and can muck up gameplay, but the illustration that the wider the net that is cast the easier it is for the antagonists to slip through it which was mostly what I was getting at rather than anything in particular. I prefer changing my vote to narrow the gap near the end of a cycle if possible and within reason. I do like the wild speculation and crazy justifications, though.

Sorry for the absence. The wedding anniversary appeared in the middle of the week, and the wife was very clear about reading the Paizo forums while we were at the hotel. I got some pretty measured looks whenever I picked up the Kindle Fire, lol. Now I am back to hopefully convince anyone not to kill me!

The thing is that I just cant throw my vote away. I was the first one out in the previous game and it sucked. Somebody has to go though. Its nothing personal Taraz. We all kind of RP'd ourselves into this. If you're lynched you will have my sympathies.

I might be wrong, but I'll double check it at some point. Anyways simply copy/pasting the last vote count and tossing it in a spoiler if it's an eyesore seems easy enough and adding your name to the list or removing it from another each time you vote.

This way we simply need to look at the last post with the vote count to gain a handle on things. It might make things easier for the rest of he players as well as our glorious DM. Plus, if names are added at the end as they come we get a nifty picture of who voted for who and when and in what order.

Just a thought I had while skimming a few pages trying to find what the tally was currently. What do you guys think?

I figured a simple copy/pasta and adding your name and changing a number is less work than relying on someone to skim dozens of posts and look for each person's vote. Much less each of us doing it individually or necessitating that our DM does the same. It would always be current as it's a simple copy/paste job from the last person to do so and requires little work skimming pages besides a simple ctrl+c & ctrl+v when you post.